I was wondering if anyone has ever seen a rubber band trick like this. It's a twisting band. I remember Jon Armstrong showing me this a couple of month ago, but I don't think he used this method.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EQU-7TiN_Q

I think Jeff McBride does a version but I think I'm using a different method to make the twist.

That effect is Vince Mendoza's it goes by another name
Vince is a member here on the Café contact him ,,Vince may of tought this to jeff McBride
vince uses the same handling with a little extra finess
vinny

Thank you Vinny, I just sent Vince a PM about it.

I know it's not a new effect but I think that I use a different method, but I'm not sure.

LOL - I didn't teach Jeff. From what I understand, his presentation uses the Magician from the tarot "As above, so below" I got a chance to show Jeff what I do last March and he loved it because there are no moves to see. Came up with it around four years ago while working on a thumb penetration. John Kennedy liked it a lot too. You can look at how I do it on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/vincentized

Take a look at "intorqueo" or "The Supreme Rubber Band Miracle"

V

So where do I learn all those effects on your channel vince? Seriously, I need new finger ring/rubber band effects.

I like Pulchritudenous, Twisted CMH and One

Wow Vince, I hadn't seen your YouTube channel before - that's amazing! Pulchritudenous looks incredible.

I have to agree with piraino...Vince, you truly are an inspiration. Great effects!

-Joe

Hello Vince,
I like the one-rubberband-twisting-on-itself effect very much (I forgot the superlative name of it, I watched it a week ago...)
The work is very well hidden, but the method is obvious while toying with the effect sinc it MUST be done that way. Do you present it to laypeople and, if yes, do you insert it in a longer routine (in order to prevent them to focus on that effect and to work it out), or do you present alone like a curious "anomaly" thing that can happen with a rubberband (but with the danger of reverse engineering)?
Thanks anyway, I'll use that (if I may).
Jonathan.

Been doing this for the past five years and I haven't worried about what you suggest, but then again, lay people won't sit there watching a video repeatedly in order to reverse engineer it - One major reason why I refused for so long to put up any video's of my work. I've also made it clear to people I've shared my work with that I am not ready to release what I haven't released. The youtube channel was put up as a tool while I've been talking to certain parties. It makes it easier for them to see some of my work. I'm going to ask you to drop this line of thought until I'm good and ready to share it with everyone.

Hello,
No problem. But, as I told you in my message, I didn't do what you suggest (i.e. watching the video all over again.) I watched it once and was very impressed. THEN, I played with it (no video there) and immediately know that only one explanation was possible for the final result to happen. The reverse-engineering process was simply experimenting on the how-to-make-that-simple-thing-unnoticeable. (That's why I think a curious spectator could very well do the same thing, and thus why I asked the question.)

BTW, I found that, for me, doing it the other way around (more or less) was more fluid and disguised in the natural flow of the hands movement. (I'll try to do a clip of that and send it to you.)

Thanks anyway,
Jonathan.